Oak Harbor, WA rejects motion to restrict carry in city council meeting

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

michaelbsc

Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2012
Messages
374
http://youtu.be/TxHnCei4wzg


Apparently on Jan. 15 of this year a guy spoke at the public comment portion of the city council meeting.

One council member got upset that the young man admitted he had a carry permit, and demanded a vote to eject him from the meeting.

The motion failed, and the Mayor apologized to the young man.

God I love this place.
 
Rick Almberg was the one who got up and left, Servatius only seconded the motion. Servatius may not have supported the motion, but he might have done so just to shut up Almberg, knowing the rest of the council would deny it. Plus since it went to motion and was denied, that sets a further precedent for any new kind of motion.
 
That was a righteous outcome!

One thing I noticed though, did most of the citizens in attendance get up and leave with the one councilman? Look at the number of people in the audience before the motion was rejected as compared to the number as the camera pans that way later on (1:58 vs 6:01 minute marks). That would be discouraging.
 
and the local newspaper coverage

http://www.whidbeynewstimes.com/news/187531841.html

This started on December 18 when the city council was presented with an amendment to their city parks code which would remove language that is in violation of state preemption law.

http://www.oakharbor.org/video-view.cfm?series=30&id=215

Several councilmembers stated they were "uncomfortable" following state law, and voted no to obeything the state law. This shows that every member of the council is anti-gun except for the real mayor, Scott Dudley, and Jim Campbell.

Then on January 2nd, two of us showed up and spoke to insist that the city council obey state law like the rest of Joe Citizens are required to:

http://www.oakharbor.org/video-view.cfm?series=32&id=235

Mr. Hoffmire was so frieghtened by the guns present that he forgot what he was going to say later in the meeting, but he wasn't frightened enough to stay away....instead he remains in the meeting to tell everyone how scared he was...4:55 into the following video:

http://www.oakharbor.org/video-view.cfm?series=32&id=238

This all led to the debacle in the January 15th meeting in the OP. The parks code is coming up again on February 5th where the council is expected to revise it to comply with state law, and they are also expected to pass a resolution to ask the Washington State Legislature to amend state law to allow them to ban firearms on public property, including city parks and city hall.

I was asked personally by Mayor Dudley to attend the February 5th meeting, but military orders are taking me out of state for a couple of weeks :-(. There are others lined up to attend, though.
 
Last edited:
One thing I noticed though, did most of the citizens in attendance get up and leave with the one councilman? Look at the number of people in the audience before the motion was rejected as compared to the number as the camera pans that way later on (1:58 vs 6:01 minute marks). That would be discouraging.
Click to expand...

Lucas Yonkman (the concealed carrier) said that the people left much later. They didn't leave with the councilman. The editing of the video made it seem like it though. Mr Yonkman said during the breaks, a lot of the people were coming up to him with questions and thanks.
 
Look at the number of people in the audience before the motion was rejected as compared to the number as the camera pans that way later on (1:58 vs 6:01 minute marks).
Click to expand...

As Midnight Oil said, the times aren't reflective of reality. If you watch the video I linked, you'll see that the 1:58 mark is at 13:15 in the full video. That video goes on for another half hour were the majority of the crowd is still there.

If you go to the next video (Senior Services of Island County Contract), you'll see many have left, but the chairs are still there. This remains the same for the next several videos where more people leave as their agenda items goes on.

The shot you are seeing at 6:01 is actually from 2:43 in the last video (http://www.oakharbor.org/video-view.cfm?keyword=01-15-13&id=262) which is from two and a half hours later.

The editing of the first video makes it look like this all happened in a few minutes when this isn't close to the case.

If you watch the full video, more than the two nay votes had comments. It's not as cut and dried as it looks in that video.
 
Councilwoman Beth Munns said she also feels it isn’t appropriate for citizens to be armed in the council chambers.

“I must admit I am very uncomfortable,” she said, “and especially if we have a room of 20 people who decided to show their Second Amendment rights I would probably ask to adjourn the meeting.”
 
If you look at the full video it seems a little less "victorious" for us. Almost all the other council members said that they supported the general idea but just didn't feel that it was appropriate to tackle such a rule making in a haphazard fashion (essentially, they wanted to sit down and craft an ordinance).

The only ones in the room that seemed in full support of the CWP holder was the mayor and the city's legal counsel.
 
While I disagree with their position, the fact that a city can defy the state gives me hope as counties and states are telling the federal government that if they want local cooperation enforcing federal gun laws, the feds won't get a hand...maybe just the finger.

NavyLCDR, you are doing good things for our cause. I'm not in the same city as you, but I appreciate it nonetheless. Keep up the good work!
 
This shows that every member of the council is anti-gun except for the real mayor, Scott Dudley, and Jim Campbell.
Click to expand...
Jim Campbell doesn't want the guy to bring his gun, either, according to the video.
 
This was posted today on Lucas Yonkman's facebook:

CALLING ALL FRIENDS AND SUPPORTERS OF THE 2ND AMENDMENT!!! A reliable source has informed me that there is a group planning to flood city hall before the meeting on the 5th that concerns the 2nd amendment. Their goal is to prevent 2nd amendment supporters from accessing the building and speaking for their rights. They want to force their gun regulation agenda on the council and the city of Oak Harbor. If you would like to join me in making a difference and take a stand for our rights please PM me and let me know. We must not allow this to happen. We must be heard. Please share this information with all of your friends. Carry on Brothers!
 
There are people who have an absolute phobia around guns. That is, - - a completely irrational & over-riding fear. Like what you see with some people and snakes. I've met a few gun phobic people like this. All but one of them were women. The 'man' had some kind of gun related experience as a kid with his harda*s military father, but would always change the subject if asked about it. If the rest of the guys wanted to do some shooting - - - plinking at cans with a .22, or shooting skeet he'd run off at the mouth and think of all sorts of excuses why we should do something else. But it was really about his own irrational fear.
 
But, what amazes me, is that they claim to be in fear of their life because of the presence of a gun.....but they will stay right there in the presence of the gun to tell everyone how afraid it is making them.
 
Yes, the behavior is completely irrational.

They fear the object (which they havent even seen) for irrational reasons, and stand around for irrational reasons. - - - Some want group approval to justify their own fears. That was true with the 'man' I described earlier. The whole thing is damned pathetic.

Some are just pushing an agenda. Could be both working (paranoia and an agenda)

Such people are impossible to reach, impossible to reason with.

But it doesnt matter what they do/think. It ultimately only matters what citizen gunowners do/think.
 
Dori Monson, the only non-liberal on KIRO news radio, interviewed the veteran and mayor just now. The councilman was invited but the show hasn't heard back yet.
 
The February 5th Oak Harbor City Council Meeting will be held in the vehicle bay of a nearby fire station to accomodate extra people. Of course the anti-gun side suggested a school building where firearms possession would be illegal.

Councilmembers:

In anticipation of larger crowd than usual, the February 5th Council Meeting will be held in the vehicle bay of the Oak Harbor Fire Department, 855 East Whidbey Avenue. (We tried the Elks Club but it is not available on the 5th.)

We will start to advertise this change via Channel 10 and our website today. It will also be announced via the Agenda Summary sent to Whidbey News Times.

Please let us know if you have any questions.
Click to expand...
 
NavyLCDR said:
The February 5th Oak Harbor City Council Meeting will be held in the vehicle bay of a nearby fire station to accomodate extra people. Of course the anti-gun side suggested a school building where firearms possession would be illegal.
Click to expand...

I dont know if I can get there in time on a workday but I have a couple of friends up there....if they dont already know about it, I know they'd love to attend, cc'ing.

(And it wont be much of a secret....he wears a fishing vest all the time).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top